aeubanks marked an inline comment as done. aeubanks added a comment. In D128955#3676198 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128955#3676198>, @tejohnson wrote:
> In D128955#3674787 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128955#3674787>, @aeubanks > wrote: > >> random question, if the old API is "legacy", are there any plans to remove >> it? > > @fhahn started to work on this at some point (see > https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41541), but I'm not sure of the status. > It is used by ld64 and I believe the sony toolchain too. if I'm seeing correctly, looks like there aren't any in-tree users of ThinLTOCodeGenerator/LTOCodeGenerator. are those out of tree? ================ Comment at: lld/test/ELF/lto/update_public_type_test.ll:5 + +; RUN: opt --thinlto-bc -o %t.o %s +; RUN: ld.lld %t.o -o %t2.o --save-temps ---------------- tejohnson wrote: > Just realized there isn't any testing of the regular LTO handling with the > new LTO API. Can you extend this test to check regular LTO as well? extended `llvm/test/LTO/X86/public-type-test.ll` Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D128955/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D128955 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
